More Scope / Less sequenser

[ARCADIOS]

I know it has been a subject so many times,
but there is always need for feedback I believe as time passes
and we become more experienced.

In a PC DAW environment, there is nothing that can be compared to Scope mixing.
As time passes, after making several configurations of my Sequenser with scope... Asio different connections,sequenser monitoring, hybrid monitoring(sequenser and scope) etc etc etc............
I believe finally that nothing compares to.. scope environment as CENTRE,and mixing monitoring with STM mixers is just superb.!!!

The STM mixers are very deep and need some time to understand AND USE their capabilitites..!

More with scope less with sequenser is always better!!! less latency,,, great sound... and getting more from the system we have so much invested and loved....

[ronnie]

Is there another way?

[hubird]

Well, monitoring directly from Scope is the only right way anyway, for track playing as well as recording.
We are supposed to connect the sound system amp to the analog out of Scope, or better get a small studio mixer, available for less than € 60,- if needed

edit: ronny captured this already I see

I try to stay away from the sequencer's track volume fader and keep it at default, using dynamic editing instead.
They say it's safe to do.

So yes, mixing in Scope is fun
At least because the mixer and it's module are organised like a real mixer, even in option menus.
But there are a few plug-ins which Scope doesn't offer, like an auto tuning program. I use Waves's.
It's lux to have an UAD card to use in Cubase, but I could perform those tasks in Scope as well.
I'm lucky to be on 34 classic Sharcs these days, so that shouldn't be a problem.
Could try that soon

Happy Scoping